Yes, it does, because he has a lot more life ahead of him, and he doesn't know what it will be like. Lots of pronouncements I would have made at 22, if I hadn't had the humility to refrain from making them, would have been wrong. Even now, not far from four decades older than 22, I'm still hesitant.
> It's our life, anyone can talk about it.
Anyone can talk about the life they've already experienced, sure. But making pronouncements about a whole human life is going way beyond that. See above.
Sure, but that's not a problem, right? People are wrong all the time, it's fine. Also, it seems quite natural that a person who hasn't lived the entire life yet hypothesizes about what I'll be like, what it should be like and what it's like for other people. Moreover, what they say seems to be based on at least one research paper, so this is basically top quality wrt the internet's standards
I try to seek novelty as much as I can. It's not about trying a new ice cream flavour, it's novel experiences. I might have to go into work for 8 hours, but there's at least 8 more hours where I don't need to always do the same things as before. And if you get a chance to work remotely and have no strong ties, you can pack up and go live elsewhere for a while.
I think the driver for me is routine. The more routine, the faster everything seems to fly by.
I'm just a few years shy of being 24 years older than 24, but I have to say my lived-experience does not agree with this observation. The time from 24-today seems much longer than the time from 0-24.
I do remember a period in my early 30s where time seemed to move fast, but hasn't felt that way in over a decade.
Though I suspect, agreeing with much of the article, this is because my life has had a fair amount of novelty in it, even as I age. I often marvel at how impossible to predict my life has been even a year out. Even a year ago I would not have imagined doing the job I'm currently doing, traveling to the places for work I currently need to, meeting the new people I have, solving problems in a space I had no understanding of.
As contrast I've often been shocked to talk with former coworkers to find that have had nothing change, not even what they're working on during the day, in the span of time that has resulted in my making multiple moves, changing multiple jobs (arguably even careers), learning new skills, etc. The most extreme was a college roommate I hadn't talked to in 20 years, and barring his marriage a few months after we last spoke, his day-to-day routine was identical to what it was 20 years ago. We only had a chance to meet up because I had briefly moved back near the area we went to school.
I moved to a new country when I was 29 and it wasn't too hard. Doing it again, at 40, with 2 kids, was probably 50 times as hard (if anything I am understating it)
My mom, at least, tells me that life can get more interesting once the kids are 10 or so, apparently.
Many people don't but life isn't over just because some people quit.
At that age we all read academic literature, philosophy and short form texts from "thinkers" and then start believing that we have had a deep profound insight into life.
However at that tender age most of us have not experienced life enough to have those insights. We have not experienced profound love or heartbreak, nor hardship and relief. Life changing events that put everything else into perspective. To someone that young there hasn't formed a deep enough well of experiences to pull from to give those ideas perspective.
For me this was 20 years ago, and were I to stand infront of that young man now I would grab him by the shoulders and tell him to stop over analysing everything and worrying about how life might end up being and instead just get on with living it.
There is so much to see, do and experience, and so little time!
This seems bogus to me. I’m 51; I set a timer on my phone for 2 minutes, put it aside and counted to about 128 before it went off.
Why would your ability to count seconds change over time? A second has always felt a little slow to me, probably because my resting pulse is above 60.
(I think it’s also ambiguously described? Maybe they meant the opposite, in which case it took me about 114 seconds to count to 120.)
There is a quote from the show Ted Lasso which I love: "Be curious, not judgemental".
Rather than proudly declare that "this seems bogus", I think it's more productive to ask why your perceived experience may not match with the study. FWIW it only took a few seconds of googling to find the study in question, likely much less time than it took you to write your comment, and then you're free to examine the methods and outcomes of that study:
I guess I've had various reasons to count time, and every once in a while check how well I count time, and if I didn't, perhaps I would start to count time faster. Thanks for the reference and clarification.
Seems counter-intuitive to me, because common sense tells us that old people think slower and therefore the world seems fast to them. So why would they be counting faster than actual time?
It also seems to contradict the thesis of the OP, as others pointed out. Years flying by is the opposite of counting time faster than the clock.
Oh well. Time is confusing!
Does anybody ever mean "seconds go by more quickly" by that statement? I've never heard it used that way...
Let's define curiosity as seeking knowledge. What is the mechanism that allows for observation if not some minimal amount of judgement? How else does one encode the senses into a coherent thought?
What is the distinction between curiosity and judgement? Is it the amount of judgement? Is the quote asking to dismiss reason and avoid integrating new knowledge with other existing knowledge?
Anyway, it sounds attractive the idea of the brain is somewhat younger if you kept learning all the way. But it may not be about “age” but flexibility or other things that we may not associate with older people.
It's tragic, and I don't want to suffer that fate. Alas, there's no escape for common trash without at least 3 million in assets.
I think our brains are addicted to novelty, and memory formation / time perception is intrinsically linked to variety. Personally I have a very nice life close to family and a good daily routine, I have little desire to change how I live. But I still recognise I'm missing out on perception of time past. I'll probably move my work hours up and take on more responsibility just to solve this problem. It's that or have a kid.
I think agency and expectations have a lot to do with it.
At one point you think the adults are keeping you from doing more fun stuff. You think when you're older you'll make your own decisions and things will be better.
Vs... you have no plans to make your future any different than your present. You know you're decades away from being old enough to retire. The evening means "not working" but it also means "nothing of any real interest or meaning." You aren't hoping to make the baseball or dance team next year. You aren't new to everything, trying to figure out relationships with friends and more for the first time.
Do you really need all the stuff? Yes, stuff is nice, but is it as nice as more time with friends and family? That's the choice.
I wonder what "stuff" you have in mind. I don't spend money on luxury items.
I also don't understand why having more money would change how you spend most of your time. It tends to be the other way around. What you do is what you make.
Sam Altman says "don't waste time", because he has the choice what to spend it on, and possibly the illusion that most people have that choice.
https://calnewport.com/does-work-life-balance-make-you-medio...
I’ve come across tropes about how Millennial discontent is based on figuring out that the idea of grinding through your 20s like it’s twenty years ago is a trap. Or something like that.
Seems like the idea is rearing its head again.
But the last paragraph of this post tells me that he’s aware that his optimism and will has its limits. “COVID came and went,” ta-huh!
the majority of people will have average-or-worse results - just definitionally
there are a lot of advantages - of circumstance, of timing, of availability, of placement, of health - that nobody has control over
if someone tells you that you can just grind yourself to generational wealth they're trying to sell you something, don't listen
you can't guarantee yourself success with the right attitude and actions
BUT
you can guarantee yourself failure pretty damn easily with the wrong ones. you don't need to be a workaholic. but you need to be willing to work for what you want. and you need to be willing to work to find what will satisfy you beyond just high scores in bank accounts. there's mental poison on both ends, both will likely leave you bitter and unfulfilled when you don't replicate someone else's tens of millions of dollars by age X
This can be interpreted in two ways, which lead to diametrically opposite conclusions.
1. I say "start" and you say "stop" when you think 120 seconds have passed, and the result (115 or 87) is the actual elapsed time.
2. I say "start" and some time later (which happens to be 120 seconds, but you don't know that) I say "stop" and ask you how much time you think has passed. The result is your response.
On the first interpretations, everyone's internal clock runs fast (everyone gets to 120 ahead of the actual time), and an old person's run faster than a young person's. On the second interpretation, everyone's mental clock runs slow and an old person's run slower than a young person's.